-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
Hook up travis.ci #24
Comments
Note, to use the OWL API it needs to be bundled into an application (it's just a java library). One such application is available from https://github.com/ontodev/robot |
@darrenleeweber -- How about a PR? |
Working on it.... |
Need to enable a travis.ci switch somewhere to proceed with the PR. I don't have permission to commit directly to this repo and probably not to enable travis - help required? |
Testing the travis functionality where I have permissions to enable it, i.e. |
Travis enabled for this repo (will need to push some update) |
Travis working on the SUL-DLSS PR, but it only runs
|
I don't know |
OWL has several profiles and, in theory, robot can check an ontology to validate whether it conforms to a profile or not. In general,
In testing this, I tried the |
Maybe I just don't understand how robot validation works - it seems to output a lot of stuff but the return status might be OK (i.e. 0), e.g.
Basically the same thing, just checking the return status/value is zero (which means "success" in unix, but does that mean the validation is good? I dunno.):
A test on the validation might have to capture the output and grep it for some kind of content that confirms the validation. |
See also related issues on robot at |
I would expect that you would have tested this before making the PR. |
I have reverted the commits until this has been tested. In addition, it was mistakenly committed to master rather than develop. |
It is tested. The fact that robot can convert the ontology means that it can parse it as an OWL ontology. There was discussion at the LD4* meeting that bioportal could not load it and I decided to use robot as an OWL API wrapper to check that it can parse/convert the ontology and have this done by travis.ci automatically. This is all working, please do not revert that work. I'm not familiar with reverting a merged PR and the unilateral decision to do so, and what to do about trying to get it back again. I would appreciate discussion about a proposed revert before actually doing a revert. So, I'm proposing that the revert is undone, because the merge practice that I'm familiar with includes deleting a branch that is merged. So it's not immediately obvious to me how to get it back without doing it all over again. In general, I'm familiar with master being the target of PRs. It is usually the default branch. If the develop branch should be the default target for PRs because master is used for something else (releases), then please consider making develop the default branch. Also describe any unconventional branch practices on the README (if not there already). |
@darrenleeweber - looks like you found Perhaps a discussion would be in order before going ahead with implementing this so that everyone is on the same page about what this does and does not do? Perhaps also some documentation would make sense too, to help those not familiar with |
Develop is now the default branch. We are following a standard branching model in which master is the release branch and all changes are committed to develop first. Develop is merged to master once the branch is ready for release. @zimeon Thanks for suggesting a discussion before the PR is acted on. I would like to understand the nature of the technology before adopting it into the project. |
In the next few months, I will be reallocated to HyBox efforts. I proposed this issue as a broad discussion about using travis to perform automatic checks on the ontology. I also did some work to create the PR that demonstrates one way that this can be done. I would appreciate merging that work as an agile first step in this direction. Additional work/PR may replace or revise this first step. It is working as expected. I may not have much time to devote to a complete education and investigation process on the best possible solution(s), but I would appreciate merging this first contribution in this direction. In essence, using robot is simply a wrapper on the OWL-API (which is just a java library, not a command line utility) and the current PR uses it to effectively parse and convert the ontology (the parsing bit is the most important). The robot developers are actively maintaining and using the project, so it is a utility that can and does respond to feature requests or bug fixes; basically I recommend using it for this purpose. |
A continuous integration platform like travis.ci can automatically run tests on changes to the ontology. Possible tests include:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: